Adelson's trial began Monday. It is expected to last at least three weeks.
www.wctv.tv
10/27/23
LIVE BLOG: Charlie and Wendi’s exes take the stand in his murder-for-hire trial
It’s the second day of testimony. He’s accused of plotting and financing the murder-for-hire of Dan Marke
5:12: The defense will question Rivera Monday; Second day of testimony wraps
If you missed our live stream of testimony Friday, you can catch up here:
5:08 p.m.: Magbanua’s boyfriend, “the dentist”
The prosecutor tells Rivera the defense’s claim that Rivera, Garcia and Magbanua came up with the plan for the murder on their own.
“Did you kill him and then try to get Katie to blackmail the dentist?” Cappleman asked.
“No,” he said, shaking his head and furrowing his brow.
The assistant state attorney asked Rivera to consider how he’d have handled things if he thought “the dentist” was going to pay them.
“Would you have been just as happy to rob the dentist?” Cappleman asked.
“Absolutely,” he sad.
“Would it have been less trouble than coming to Tallahassee?” she asked.
“Absolutely,” he said.
4:55 p.m.: Rivera describes following and shooting Markel, then getting paid
Rivera testified they followed Markel to a daycare in Tallahassee where he dropped off his kids.
The pair watched the kids go inside, he said.
They followed him to the gym, and then they followed Markel to his home, he said. They approached Markel’s house from either end of Trescott Drive, he said.
“Garcia jumped out and shot him,” Rivera said.
“How many times?” Cappleman asked.
“Twice,” he said.
Cappleman displayed photos of Garcia and Rivera stopping at an ATM on the way home. Rivera confirmed it was him and Garcia in the photos.
He said Magbanua gave him the money the day after he returned home. It was “all hundreds, staples,” he described it. He said he received $35,000 from her.
4:28 p.m.: Rivera, the accused getaway driver, takes the stand
The prosecutor is talking to Rivera about he is serving a sentence on federal racketeering charges in connection to a gang he was a part of in South Florida.
He is serving his sentence for the Dan Markel murder concurrently with his federal charges, Rivera confirmed to Cappleman.
Rivera said he became a part of the plot to kill Markel because of his friendship with Sigfredo Garcia, who he called a brother.
He said his motive to kill Markel was money, and he didn’t know Dan Markel.
“So I am correct that Katie hired Garcia, and Garcia hired you?” Cappleman asked.
“Yes ma’am,” he said.
“Do you know where she got the money from?” Cappleman asked.
“Yeah, the people,” he said.
“Who are the people?” she asked.
“The dentist, I called him the dentist at the time,” the witness said.
Rivera said “the people” referred to Wendi and Charlie.
He said the motive for “the dentist” was “for the kids, to get the kids back.”
“It had something to do with getting Wendi’s kids?” Cappleman clarified.
“Yes ma’am,” he said.
Rivera said he didn’t know and had never met the dentist personally.
“His connection us was that he was Katie’s (Magbanua’s) boyfriend,” he said.
On the drive up to Tallahassee Rivera learned the payment for the hit was “100 grand,” he told the prosecutor.
The accused getaway driver said it was split three ways, between Garcia, Rivera and Magbanua. It wasn’t connected at all to the gang he was part of, he said.
Rivera said Garcia drove to Tallahassee from South Florida, and Rivera drove back down after the murder.
He said they knew how to get to Markel because of an address provided on a piece of paper. He said they did not get that information from a blog of Facebook.
Under Cappleman’s questioning, Rivera laid out the plan for the murder as he remembers it.
Garcia was supposed to do the murder, he said. And it would not happen in front of the kids.
On the way up to Tallahassee, Rivera suggested a change of plans:
“I said let’s go back and rob the lady,” he said.
He told Cappleman “the lady” was Wendi because he believed she was the one with the money to pay for the hit.
But Garcia pushed back, according to Rivera.
“Garcia said no, they had to get the job done, it had to be done for Katie?” Cappleman asked.
“Yes ma’am,” he said.
About 4:15 p.m.: Another break
During the break, bailiffs brought in Luis Rivera.
Rivera was convicted of being the second hitman, the getaway driver. He took a plea in 2016 in exchange for his testimony against the other alleged conspirators.
4:02 p.m.: Defense questions Charlie’s former friend
“Charlie talks a lot, right?” Rashbaum asked.
“Yes, sir,” Fitzpatrick said.
“Repeats himself a lot?” the attorney asked.
“Yes, sir,” the witness responded.
Under Rashbaum’s questioning, the former friend testified that it became public knowledge in 2016 that authorities sought to arrest Charlie, but that didn’t come to fruition at the time.
Then, they moved into Charlie’s filing against Fitzpatrick.
“Isn’t it true that you stole from Charlie?” Rashbaum asked.
“No, not at all,” the witness responded.
Rashbaum said Fitzpatrick stole checks from Charlie, but the witness said that case was dismissed.
The defense attorney began reading messages Fitzpatrick sent Charlie after the lawsuit was filed. He are a few of the messages the former friend said he did indeed send to Charlie:
“I don’t owe you .”
“You open your mouth and I’ll open mine.”
“I dare you to threaten me again I’ll be on the phone with the FBI before you blink you murderer.”
Rashbaum asked if the case against Fitzpatrick was dismissed because Charlie was arrested, and the former friend said he didn’t know.
He found out last week, he testified.
3:51 p.m.: Charlie’s former friend testifies
Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie’s former friend, said they were close until about 2018 when they had a falling out.
Fitzpatrick testified that Charlie was close to Wendi. He said the Adelson was “not fond” of Dan Markel.
“Did he ever make a statement to you about murder?” Cappleman asked.
The former friend said Adelson had a dark sense of humor. He said yes, and recalled what Charlie told him:
“You can get away with anything, you can get away with murder, if you keep your mouth shut,” Fitzpatrick said.
Charlie filed a lawsuit against Fitzpatrick in 2018, and they’re no longer friends, he testified. Cappleman questioned if he dislikes Charlie now.
“I mean, not a big fan, no,” he said.
“Are you here to bring him down?” Cappleman asked.
“No, I don’t want to be here at all,” Fitzpatrick said.
The prosecutor asked him if he is her pursuant to a subpoena, and he said yes.
3:48 p.m.: Lacasse’s notes
Lacasse said he destroyed his notes after his interview with law enforcement.
“Sir, the truth is, you destroyed those notes and we can’t read them?” Rashbaum asked.
Lacasse said yes.
Cappleman briefly pointed out with the witness that there was no law requiring to keep the notes. Then, he left the courtroom.
3:30 p.m.: We’re on break
Lacasse told Cappleman he took around 100 pages of notes on the case and his experiences with the Adelsons over the last nine years.
The defense requested to see the notes.
After break, the defense is going to ask him about them.
3:15 p.m.: Defense — You believe that Wendi Adelson tried to frame you for Dan Markel’s murder?
The defense has taken over questioning.
“You believe that Wendi Adelson tried to frame you for Dan Markel’s murder, don’t you?” Rashbaum asked Lacasse.
“I’m suspicious,” he said.
Rashbaum asked if Wendi told him Charlie had looked into hiring a hitman a week before they broke up. Lacasse said it wasn’t exactly a week after. The defense questioned that she would tell him such a big secret right before she broke up with him.
“She had a habit of blurting things out in her own self interest,” he said.
Rashbaum questioned Lacasse about how he told police after the murder that he was worried Wendi was involved, but he also told them it was “uncomfortable” to discuss.
“I was still under her spell at this point,” the ex said. “I would say I was fairly pathetic at that point.”
Months later, he told police of a dinner he’d heard Wendi attended with her brother where Wendi vomited. Lacasse called the dinner a “celebratory dinner,” and said Wendi told him Charlie called it that.
Wendi testified earlier that she did vomit during a dinner with her brother, but she denies it was “celebratory.”
If you knew Charlie had previously talked about hiring a hitman, and then he had a celebratory dinner after Markel’s murder, why didn’t you go to the authorities, Rashbaum asked.
“I didn’t come in right away because I was scared of your client, I was scared of the repercussions,” the witness said.
Rashbaum questioned why he decided to speak months later.
“I decided to man up,” Lacasse said.
3:03 p.m.: Now Lacasse is up again
Lacasse told the prosecution Wendi told him in confidence that Charlie looked into hiring a hitman when her request to relocate was denied.
He said he wasn’t sure if it was going to cost $15,000 or $50,000.
“This was chilling, it was scary, it made my stomach flip,” he said.
Close to the end of their relationship, Lacasse said he and Wendi went to yoga together. She said she was “cold” to him and he “thought it was over,” but then when they went to go, her tone changed, according to the ex.
Under Cappleman’s questioning, he said Wendi asked him lots of questions about his plans for that Friday — which was the 18th, the day of Markel’s murder.
According to Lacasse, he told her that he would be leaving town on a trip to Tennessee. He said he told Wendi the details of those plans.
After more questioning, he said that he would have driven past Markel’s home at around the time of the murder in a similar vehicle to the one the hitmen used.
He told Cappleman and the jury the other time he went out of town that spring was when the hitmen had traveled to Tallahassee in their first attempt to kill Dan Markel, which didn’t end up happening.
“Really, I took two trips during the spring outside of Tallahassee, and both times they tried to kill Danny Markel,” he said.
2:57 p.m.: Wendi is up again
“Miss Adelson, we have two points we need to clarify with you,” Cappleman started.
She is asking him a series of questions about Lacasse.
She asked if she told her ex-boyfriend she had to tell him something in confidence, that she had to tell him Charlie had explored all options including thousands of dollars, to deal with Dan Markel? She denied all of those statements.
2:52 p.m.: “Has Charlie ever told you to lie?”
Charlie has never told Umchinda to lie, she testified. But she misheard the question first, and said that he has told her a lie before.
The defense then sat down, and the prosecution began questioning her. The first thing they asked was to confirm that he has lied to her, and she said yes.
The judge and audience members chuckled and smirked.
2:38 p.m.: The defense cross-examines Charlie’s ex-girlfriend
Umchinda said she has never met Rashbaum.
They began to discuss some of her relationship timeline with Charlie.
She said she didn’t know him in 2014, but is speaking again about knowing him during the time of the FBI “bump” with Donna.
The defense is having her describe Charlie’s lifestyle. He worked early mornings and late nights, and oftentimes six days a week, she said.
She said Charlie wouldn’t call her often during his travels for work. They’d usually text and see each other before and after.
Rashbaum asked her about the money, too. She confirmed that Charlie carried lots of cash, but the defense emphasized it was seen in 2016, two years after the murder of Dan Markel.
Adelson had many guns, security cameras and barbed wire at his house, Umchinda testified. The defense said Charlie slept with a gun in his nightstand and asked her to confirm, but she said she didn’t know him to sleep with a gun in his nightstand.
She said she never felt threatened by him.
“Did you ever think that Charlie Adelson was going to hurt you?” she asked.
“No,” she said.
She said he was angry, “flustered and stressed out” by much of the media coverage around Markel’s murder during their time together, Umchinda testified.
2 p.m.: Charlie’s ex-girlfriend testifies
June Umchinda, Adelson’s ex-girlfiend, takes the stand.
She told the prosecution she still has feelings for him.
“He’s my last serious boyfriend,” she said. “There’s something still there, I still care about him.”
They’ve been on-again-off-again since 2016, but she said she said she hasn’t spoken to him since he was arrested.
They were together in 2016 when Donna Adelson was approached by an undercover FBI agent and pretended to extort her. She said the relationship was very serious, and she basically lived with him.
“Fairytale?” Cappleman asked.
“Yes,” Umchinda replied.
“Perfect?” Cappleman asked.
“Yes,” she said.
“Inseparable?” Cappleman asked.
“Yes,” she said.
A reporter approached Umchinda in 2016 in Charlie’s driveway, Cappleman and Umchinda said. The reporter though was Katherine, and Umchinda said she didn’t know who that was. She found out about Katherine Magbanua later.
Umchinda said Charlie had mentioned during their relationship that his former brother-in-law was murdered, but she said she didn’t know the details.
“He told me he was shot and didn’t know who did it,” she said.
Charlie’s ex said she spoke with law enforcement about the case in 2018. She’s testified in court previously, too.
In an interview with law enforcement, she told them she found out Charlie had been speaking frequently with Magbanua and asked him why.
A transcript of that interview says Umchinda told officials Charlie was always prepared to go away in case “they” came for him, but his ex said that wasn’t true. She wouldn’t answer Cappleman on if the transcript was incorrect, or why it wasn’t correct.
Cappleman asked her how Charlie reacted to Magbanua’s arrest.
“Well I guess his behavior was of someone who was being... accused of murder,” Umchinda said.
She said he was irritable, couldn’t sleep and got a second phone after her arrest. He acted “crazy” at times, she said.
“Was he super stressed and very affected by the arrest of Katherine Magbanua,” Cappleman asked.
“Yes,” Umchinda said.
The South Florida woman also said she knew Donna Adelson.
Umchinda said Donna was also stressed after Magbanua’s arrest. She also testified that Donna was very involved with her grandchildren. She also knew Wendi.
“Did she make a comment to you that things were still hard for her even though Dan was gone?” Cappleman asked.
Umchinda said yes. The witness also recalled a time when Charlie told her he was arguing with Wendi about the Dan Markel murder case.
“And was wendi not speaking to the defendant for some period of time because of something to do with this case?”
She said yes, but she didn’t know specifically what about the case caused the rift.
The witness also testified that Charlie would carry large bundles of cash stapled together.
1:18 p.m.: Dan Markel’s divorce lawyer testifies
The bailiff is bringing in the jury. The state called Stephen Webster as the next witness.
He was Dan Markel’s divorce lawyer from May 2014 until he was murdered. But at first he didn’t want to represent him. Webster said he didn’t do family law.
But he changed his mind when they met.
“And so I met him, and I liked him,” he said. “I liked him a lot.”
Webster said Markel told him he heard Donna call him “stupid” on a Skype call.
“There’s a reason he hired me,” Webster testified. “He didn’t retain me because he needed a friend.”
He denied that Markel’s behavior was in conflict with the divorce settlement. Wendi said during her testimony that she sought to hold him in contempt because he didn’t fulfill his end of the divorce settlement by giving Wendi half the value of what had been their house.
“Seeking contempt is kind of a big deal amongst lawyers, right?” Cappleman asked.
He agreed. He said Wendi was the one who should’ve been held in contempt.
“I did feel like she should be held in contempt,” he said. “She didn’t disclose things in her financial affidavit... And at the end of the day, you could lose your law license over that... So yeah, it’s pretty serious.”
11:34 a.m.:
The jury returned and the defense cross-examined Lacasse.
11 a.m.: The judge rules with the defense not to impeach Wendi based on Lacasse’s testimony
The jury left the room. The prosecution wants to ask Lacasse about a statement he says Wendi Adelson made to him. The defense says they can’t discuss it because it is double hearsay.
The defense argued it is double hearsay because Lacasse said the conversation centered on something Wendi heard from Charlie.
The issue is complicated.
Rashbaum said they discussed this alleged conversation this morning in a sidebar.
During that sidebar, Rashbaum gained the impression prosecutors wouldn’t ask about it. The judge said he accepted before today’s testimony a motion from the defense to block the prosecution from discussing the topic, agreeing with the defense it would be double hearsay.
But Cappleman claimed she said, “I would not introduce hearsay within hearsay [double hearsay] without exceptions.”
She says this alleged conversation is an exception. The prosecution argued to the judge that during the sidebar they never said they wouldn’t impeach Wendi, or call her testimony into question, based on Lacasse’s testimony on the alleged conversation.
The defense argued to the judge it would be unfair for the prosecution to discuss the conversation with Lacasse because the defense would have asked Wendi more specific questions about the conversation.
The prosecution says they asked Wendi during her testimony about the alleged conversation, and she denied it took place. The judge asked for a response to the unfairness the defense claimed.
“I don’t know what to do about that judge, I can’t help Mr. Rashbaum have better strategy,” Cappleman said.
Rashbaum was visibly and audibly flustered as he responded.
“Hold on, my ears work perfectly well you don’t have to raise your voice,” the judge told the defense attorney.
The defense argued they would not be able to call Wendi back up to the stand after Lacasse contradicted her testimony because Wendi is only testifying under a state subpoena and the defense could not offer her immunity like the state can.
Ultimately, the judge ruled with the defense. The prosecution is not allowed to ask him about the contents of the conversation, which Lacasse described as “shocking” during a proffer, or questioning when the jury is not present.
The judge said his ruling was in fairness to the defense because the prosecution gave them the impression they wouldn’t ask Lacasse about it.
Cappleman said she implemented the same strategy last trial, to impeach Wendi based on Lacasse’s testimony, and it was allowed. She said the ruling was not fair to the state, but she accepts and understands the decision.
10:55 a.m.:
Lacasse said he and Wendi had a big argument during their relationship while they were away on a trip to Gainesville.
He said Wendi was “throwing herself” at him, and making significant promises. Lacasse testified Wendi suggested the kids call him “Daddy” and that he move in with her, but at the same time he had suspicions Wendi was seeing someone else.
He said he felt he was being “strung along.” All those topics were part of the argument, he said.
While they were together, Wendi told him the family was planning a “big” gift for her father Harvey’s birthday, Lacasse testified. But he said he didn’t know what that gift was.
During testimony Thursday, Wendi said she knew they celebrated her father Harvey’s birthday weeks after Markel’s death, but couldn’t remember what gift he received.
Cappleman asked Wendi Thursday if Dan Markel’s death was the gift. Wendi said no.
10:40 a.m.: Wendi Adelson’s ex-boyfriend Jeffrey Lacasse testifies
The prosecution is speaking to Lacasse. He was dating Wendi at the time of Dan Markel’s murder.
The week of June 4 to June 9, his girlfriend was acting strangely nervous, according to Lacasse.
“She was a nervous wreck to the point where she was sick to her stomach,” he said.
Officials later learned the hitmen were in town at the time in part of the plan to murder Markel, although he was not killed at that time.
Cappleman asked if Wendi told him that hitmen were in town to kill her husband. He said no.
Lacasse said he remembered when Wendi’s TV broke. The Adelson sister has testified that her kids threw a toy and broke the TV. But Lacasse said otherwise.
“I just couldn’t see how the kids could have done it,” Lacasse said.
He said it must have been something big and heavy and forceful that broke it.
The prosecution also spoke with Lacasse about a social event.
Lacasse said he went to dinner with Wendi, Charlie and Katherine Mabanua before Markel’s murder.
Mabanua mentioned at the meal she had an “ex-common-law husband” who had a criminal history, Lacasse said. He said Charlie didn’t seem concerned by this information.
Cappleman asked if Charlie mentioned having connections to a criminal element.
“He mentioned having contacts on both sides of the tracks,” he said.
The prosecutor asked how he felt about those connections.
“He seemed to be bragging,” Lacasse said.
10:22 a.m.: Jury returns from a brief break, prosecution calls Brannon to the stand
The prosecution calls TPD Officer Bill Brannon to the stand. He responded to the scene of Dan Markel’s murder on Trescott Drive in 2014.
His patrol car was blocking Trescott Drive near Centerville Road that day, he said.
“From the roadblock where you were positioned, could you see the crime scene?” the prosecutor asked.
“Yes,” he said.
She asked if it would have been obvious to someone approaching him that law enforcement was at the Markel house, and he said yes.
The defense objected, citing speculation, and Circuit Judge Stephen Everett sustained the motion.
Cappleman projected an image of a red Honda Odyssey on a screen and asked Brannon if the car approached his roadblock on Trescott Drive that day.
“It appears to be a vehicle I saw approaching the scene that day,” he said.
He said he was familiar with that type of car. His wife used to drive the same model, and now his daughter does, the officer testified.
Brannon told the jury the car didn’t stop or ask about the crime scene.
The defense briefly cross-examined Brannon, saying a forensic investigator on the scene estimated the roadblock was five to six cars away from Markel’s home, while Brannon said it was three or four cars away.
Cappleman returned for questioning, and asked him, regardless of the number of houses, was the crime scene and home visible where the roadblock was.
Brannon said it was visible from his viewpoint.
Then, he was released from the court, meaning he won’t be asked to testify again.
10:16 a.m.:
About 10 a.m.: Wendi reacts to the defense’s claims
“Are you angry that according to your brother’s theory, he and your mom have known who killed your children’s father in 2016?” Cappleman asked.
“I’m more angry that they killed my children’s father,” Wendi said.
“So you’re not angry?” Cappleman responded.
“I’m angry about so many things, it’s hard to separate them,” Wendi said.
“Well try,” Cappleman pressed.
“I’m confused,” Wendi said. “It’s hard to process.”
The defense says Markel’s hitmen threatened to kill Charlie’s family if the periodontist didn’t pay them. Cappleman said Wendi would have been one of those people, and asked if she was told of that threat.
She said no.
If Wendi had known, Cappleman asked, “would you have made the decision to move down to south Florida closer to the killers?”
“No, I would not have,” Wendi said. “I found out yesterday.”
9:52 a.m.: Prosecutor Georgia Cappleman questions Wendi
Prosecutor Georgia Cappleman began questioning Wendi. She brought up all the plans for a future in Tallahassee Wendi had made that would’ve followed Markel’s death.
They never happened, Cappleman said. Wendi affirmed.
Cappleman asked if Wendi was on a dating site while she was with her ex-boyfriend Lacasse. She said she wasn’t sure when exactly their relationship ended.
The prosecutor pushed if it was possible that she could have been on it when they were still dating, and if he had reason to be jealous, as Wendi has previously described him.
“I think he had some serious jealousy issues that may or may not be founded,” Wendi said.
Then, on the custody arrangements with Dan Markel’s parents. Cappleman asked what was wrong with Dan’s mother in 2016 trying to make arrangements for the children in the event of Wendi’s arrest?
Wendi said Ruth Markel was trying to put them in foster care. Cappleman said that would only be if Wendi was arrested while the Markels traveled from their home in Canada to Florida. But Wendi said Ruth never said that, and that the arrangements were unnecessary.
“I wasn’t going to be arrested for a crime I didn’t commit.”
Wendi Adelson
“Do Dan’s parents know whether you committed the crime or not?” Cappleman asked. In 2016, when the first arrests were made in the case and things were still “fresh,” the prosecutor pushed, would they have known if Wendi was going to be arrested?
“That was two years after Danny’s murder,” Wendi said. “I don’t know what.”
The prosecutor moved on to visitation between the children and the Markels since their son was killed.
“How many times have the kids visited Dan’s parents since this murder?” Cappleman asked.
“Many, it would be hard to count,” Wendi said.
“How many times have they seen him in the last year?” Cappleman asked.
Wendi said it’s hard to count, “but every time they’ve asked for it, we’ve arranged it?”
Cappleman questioned that, and Wendi clarified that they had come to an agreement after some tension when the Markels “tried to put my kids in foster care.”
Cappleman asked if the Markels seeing the children had been a big issue, but Wendi didn’t quite say one way or the other.
9:29 a.m.: Back to the TV and Wendi’s whereabouts the day of the murder
Rashbaum shows Wendi a document that says the TV’s warranty is under her father, Harvey Adelson’s name. Wendi confirms that’s what it says.
She testifies her mother scheduled the TV repair and gave her a number to call back if Wendi needed to reschedule.
Then Rashbaum moves into Wendi’s plans the day of the murder. She went to ABC Liquors on Betton Road to buy a bottle of bourbon for an upcoming plan, the mother testifies.
She tried to take Trescott Drive to get to the store, which was the street her ex-husband lived on, but it was blocked off with crime scene tape at the time. Wendi has always asserted she didn’t know it was blocked off because Markel was murdered.
She said she was shocked when she heard of the shooting later that day.
“You were pretty open with police, telling them a lot of things right?” Rashbaum asked.
“They kept telling me they needed my help,” she said.
“Isn’t the first person you mentioned in the interview yourself?” Rashbaum asked.
“Yes,” she said.
She testified that she would understand if police thought she was responsible. She agreed to be fingerprinted, checked for gunshot residue and gave authorities her computer and phone to be searched, she testified.
Wendi said she spoke with her mother the evening of the murder around 7 p.m., but didn’t speak to her brother Charlie until the next day. The defense said she spoke with him the next morning, but Wendi said she didn’t remember the conversation.
Her parents traveled to Tallahassee to be with her after the news of Markel’s murder.
“When they got there, they were scared and frantic, right?” Rashbaum asked.
“Yes,” Wendi said.
9:26 a.m.:
The judge reads the school drop-off schedule Wendi and Markel had with their children. The defense and prosecution both agree this schedule is factual.
The defense asks if someone claimed to see Wendi and the boys walking near Markel’s house outside that schedule it would be incorrect.
“It would be some other woman and some other kids,” Wendi said.
Rashbaum also brings up Markel’s tendency to post his travel plans on Facebook and his blog, and Wendi affirms the statement.
They attended her ex-husband’s memorial service, and the next day they traveled to South Florida to be with her family. The defense asked Wendi if she “wasn’t herself” when she left Tallahassee and realized in Miami that she couldn’t raise the boys on her own.
“I was a mess,” she said. “I hadn’t slept in days, and I was terrified.”
After her ex-husband’s death, Wendi said she had a good relationship with his parents.
And then in 2016 things changed. Wendi received word Ruth Markel, Dan Markel’s mother, was seeking to gain custody of the children if Wendi was arrested, according to Rashbaum.
Wendi testified that she saw that action as the Markels believing she was responsible for her ex-husband’s murder. If fundamentally altered her relationship with her children’s other grandparents.
Rashbaum asked if Wendi attempted to “erase” Dan Markel from her sons’ lives. She said no.
“Each boy has a picture of them and their dad over their bed that we say good morning to and goodnight to every day.”
Wendi Adelson
The defense asked if Markel’s death affected her positively or negatively, and she said it was negative.
“But you got to live in South Florida,” Rashbaum said.
“It’s not a benefit,” Wendi responded.
9:14 a.m.: Wendi testifies about her ex-boyfriend, plans in Tallahassee
The is going through Wendi’s history with her ex-boyfriend, Jeffery Lacasse.
They discuss a dinner she and Lacasse had with Charlie and his then-girlfriend, Katherine Magbanua.
“Are you aware that Sigfredo Garcia was watching you at that dinner?” Rashbaum asked.
“No,” she said.
The defense is arguing Garcia, who has two children with Magbanua, was still in love with her. Garcia and Magbanua have both been found convicted in Markel’s murder.
They say Garcia’s love for Magbanua made him hate Adelson.
“Are you aware that he was contemplating your brother off the road during that dinner?” Rashbaum asked.
“No,” Wendi said.
8:46 a.m.:
Wendi Adelson is on the stand again. The defense is questioning her on plans she made in 2014 that were scheduled after her ex-husband Dan Markel’s murder.
Among those plans, Wendi was slated to be the keynote speaker at Florida State University’s convocation ceremony in August 2014 — after Markel’s murder.
She also made plans for her family to come visit that year and expressed interest in joining the board of a Tallahassee nonprofit, defense attorney Daniel Rashbaum said. She also booked flights leaving from and returning to Florida’s capital city.
“Why did you make those tickets to go back to Tallahassee?” Rashbaum asked.
“That is where I lived,” she responded.
As the defense speaks to Wendi about her plans, her brother looks on, hands in his lap, lips tight, nodding occasionally.
8:45 a.m.:
Court is in session. A bailiff is summoning jurors.
@Niner
. 